On October 7, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio delivered a speech at the Pnyx in Athens, one of the most historically significant locations associated with ancient Greek democracy. Standing near the Acropolis, he reflected on the foundations of Western civilization, the achievements of the ancient Greeks, and the historical responsibilities of nations that have inherited their intellectual and political traditions. He emphasized the importance of national sovereignty, cultural confidence, and the willingness of free societies to defend their institutions and historical inheritance.
Listening to his argument, I found myself thinking about a republic established thousands of kilometers away from Athens: the Republic of China (中華民國), which celebrates its 115th National Day on October 10, 2026.
The connection may initially seem unusual. Ancient Athens, the Roman Republic, the American Revolution, and the Chinese republican revolution emerged from very different historical circumstances. Their political institutions were not identical, and their understandings of citizenship, sovereignty, and individual rights differed considerably. Nevertheless, they can be examined through a common question: how can a political community establish legitimate government while preventing political authority from becoming an instrument of arbitrary power?
This question has occupied philosophers and political reformers for centuries. It also runs through the entire history of the Republic of China, from the Wuchang Uprising of 1911 to the constitutional democracy that exists in Taiwan today.
For me, the 115th National Day is therefore more than a commemoration of a revolution. It is an opportunity to reflect on the survival of a republic that has experienced imperial restoration, political fragmentation, foreign invasion, civil war, authoritarian government, diplomatic isolation, and ultimately democratization.
From Gonghe to the Republic of China: The Political Meaning Behind the Nation’s Name
It is worth noting that the modern Chinese term Gonghe (共和), commonly used to translate “republic,” did not emerge entirely from the introduction of Western political thought. The expression already appeared in the historical tradition of the Western Zhou dynasty, referring to a period of unusual political arrangements following the departure of King Li. The character gong conveys the idea of sharing or acting jointly, while he suggests harmony and coordination. From a conceptual perspective, these meanings invite comparison with the Latin expression *res publica*, literally referring to public affairs or matters belonging to the political community. Nevertheless, the precise nature of the Zhou arrangement remains disputed, particularly whether authority was exercised jointly by two senior officials or by Gongbo He as regent. It would therefore be misleading to identify the ancient Chinese episode with a republic in the modern constitutional sense.
With the introduction of Western political thought into East Asia during the nineteenth century, Gonghe gradually acquired a new meaning as a translation of “republic.” This development was shaped by intellectual exchanges between China and Japan, through which established Chinese expressions were adapted to describe modern political institutions. In this context, republicanism came to signify more than the absence of a hereditary monarch. It also raised fundamental questions concerning the public character of political authority, constitutional limitations on government, and the distinction between the state and the personal interests of its rulers.
The official name of the Republic of China, established in 1912, reflects these political aspirations. Zhonghua refers to the historical and cultural community associated with China, while Minguo expresses the idea of a state belonging to the people rather than to an emperor or ruling dynasty. Although the Chinese name Zhonghua Minguo does not literally contain the term Gonghe, the concept of Minguo is closely connected to modern republican political thought. Its official English designation, Republic of China, makes this relationship explicit.
The historical connection between the Zhou-period Gonghe, the Roman res publica, and the modern Republic of China should therefore be understood as a comparison of political ideas rather than a continuous institutional tradition. Across different civilizations and historical circumstances, these concepts raise a common question: does political authority belong personally to the ruler, or should it be exercised on behalf of the political community? The establishment of the Republic of China in 1912 represented a significant attempt to answer this question through the creation of a modern republican state.
Remembering the Centennial in Shanghai
I still remember the centennial of the Republic of China in 2011. I was living in Shanghai, and although internet censorship was already a reality in mainland China, it was still possible for me to follow certain events and political discussions concerning the Republic of China.
I remember watching President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) deliver his National Day address. He discussed the historical significance of the Xinhai Revolution (辛亥革命), the continuity of the Republic of China, and the complicated relationship between mainland China and Taiwan.
I was deeply moved by the occasion.
Since childhood, I had identified with the Republic of China. This identification developed partly because I began to recognize problems and omissions in the historical narratives promoted by the Chinese Communist Party. I gradually came to understand that the history of modern China was much more complicated than the account presented in mainland Chinese textbooks.
The Republic of China represented an alternative historical continuity. It was the republic founded after the overthrow of the Qing dynasty, the constitutional state that resisted Japanese aggression during the Second Sino-Japanese War, and the government that participated in the founding of the United Nations.
I also developed the habit of dating my writings according to the Republic of China calendar. This was a personal expression of my identification with the republic. I may have written a commentary commemorating the centennial in 2011, although I can no longer remember whether it survived. If it was published on a mainland Chinese blogging platform, it may subsequently have been removed.
Fifteen years have passed since that centennial. Looking back, I am struck not simply by the Republic of China’s longevity, but by how much political and historical suffering lies behind its survival.
The Chinese Republican Revolution and the Meaning of 1911
The Wuchang Uprising (武昌起義) began on October 10, 1911. It was the decisive revolutionary event that triggered the collapse of the Qing dynasty and led to the establishment of the Republic of China on January 1, 1912.
Sun Yat-sen (孫中山), whom the Republic of China honors as its founding father, had devoted many years to revolutionary organization, fundraising, and the promotion of republican ideas. Although he did not personally command the Wuchang Uprising, his political activities and those of his fellow revolutionaries helped prepare the intellectual and organizational foundations of the revolution.
The significance of the revolution was profound. For the first time in modern Chinese history, the hereditary monarchy was replaced by a republican state that claimed political legitimacy from the people rather than from an imperial dynasty.
The word republic also has an interesting history in the Chinese language. The expression gonghe (共和) appeared in ancient Chinese historical writing, notably in connection with the Gonghe Regency (共和行政) during the Western Zhou dynasty (c. 1046–771 BC). That arrangement was not a republic in the modern democratic sense, and the precise historical interpretation of the regency remains debated. Nevertheless, the older term eventually became part of the vocabulary through which modern Chinese intellectuals understood republican government, alongside political concepts transmitted through Japanese translations of Western thought.
This illustrates an important point. Different civilizations may develop distinct political traditions, but they can also reinterpret older concepts when confronting new institutional challenges.
Sun Yat-sen’s Three Principles of the People (三民主義)—nationalism, democracy, and the people’s livelihood—were intended to provide an intellectual foundation for the new republic. These principles were not identical to classical liberalism, but their republican and constitutional aspirations contributed to the development of modern Chinese political thought.
The revolution succeeded in overthrowing the monarchy. Establishing a stable constitutional democracy, however, proved far more difficult.
From the Provisional Constitution to the Constitution of 1947
The Provisional Constitution of the Republic of China (中華民國臨時約法), promulgated on March 11, 1912, represented an early attempt to establish constitutional government. It recognized popular sovereignty, provided for representative institutions, and sought to restrain executive power.
The constitutional settlement was soon undermined by Yuan Shikai (袁世凱). Yuan had played a crucial role in securing the Qing abdication and initially appeared capable of consolidating the new republic. Yet his government increasingly concentrated political authority. In 1914, he replaced the provisional constitutional framework with the Constitutional Compact of the Republic of China (中華民國約法), which substantially expanded presidential power.
His subsequent attempt to restore monarchy in 1915–1916 was a serious setback for republicanism. Following his death in 1916, the country entered a prolonged period of political fragmentation and warlord conflict.
The Beiyang period (北洋時期) was complex. Certain periods witnessed intellectual and journalistic pluralism, while military conflict and institutional instability repeatedly undermined the possibility of durable constitutional government.
The struggle to establish a functioning republic continued through the Northern Expedition, the Second Sino-Japanese War, and the constitutional debates of the 1930s and 1940s.
A decisive milestone finally came with the National Constituent Assembly (制憲國民大會), which convened in Nanjing on November 15, 1946, and adopted the Constitution of the Republic of China (中華民國憲法) on December 25, 1946. The Constitution was promulgated on January 1, 1947, and entered into force on December 25, 1947.
Taiwan’s Participation in the Constituent Assembly
An important historical detail is sometimes overlooked: Taiwan Province was represented in the constitutional process of 1946.
Following the end of Japanese colonial rule in 1945, Taiwan was incorporated into the Republic of China’s constitutional arrangements as Taiwan Province (臺灣省). Representatives from Taiwan participated in the National Constituent Assembly that adopted the Constitution.
According to historical records preserved by the Taiwan Historica (國史館臺灣文獻館), the Taiwan Provincial Assembly selected representatives in late October 1946 through an indirect electoral process involving local councils and provincial-level voting. Eighteen representatives from Taiwan participated in the constitutional proceedings, including representatives of geographical constituencies and various occupational and social groups.
This distinction deserves precision. The Taiwanese representatives were not elected through a direct universal election conducted across the entire island. Their selection was indirect, and the constitutional process itself occurred under the political conditions of the time. Nevertheless, their participation is an important historical fact.
It demonstrates that Taiwan was not absent from the constitution-making process of the Republic of China.
The Constitution adopted in 1946 established a five-branch system of government, consisting of the Executive Yuan (行政院), Legislative Yuan (立法院), Judicial Yuan (司法院), Examination Yuan (考試院), and Control Yuan (監察院).
It also provided for the National Assembly (國民大會), which was entrusted with important constitutional powers, including the election of the president and vice president and the amendment of the Constitution.
The National Assembly can be compared in a limited sense with the American Electoral College because it originally elected the president. However, the analogy is incomplete. The National Assembly possessed broader constitutional responsibilities, and the Legislative Yuan and Control Yuan were not direct equivalents of the two chambers of the United States Congress.
The First National Assembly and the Constitutional Presidency of 1948
The Constitution’s entry into force was followed by the election of representatives to the First National Assembly (第一屆國民大會).
The nationwide election began on November 21, 1947, and included electoral participation in Taiwan Province. The representatives were elected under the constitutional and electoral arrangements then in force, although the broader political environment remained affected by civil war and restrictions on political competition.
On March 29, 1948, the First National Assembly convened in Nanjing. On April 20, it elected Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正) as president and Li Tsung-jen (李宗仁) as vice president. They formally assumed office on May 20, 1948.
These events marked the formal implementation of the constitutional presidency established by the 1947 Constitution.
Chiang Kai-shek was therefore the first president elected under the constitutional framework by the First National Assembly. This was an indirect constitutional election conducted by representatives chosen under the electoral system of the period, not a direct popular presidential election of the kind introduced in Taiwan in 1996.
The distinction matters. It would be historically inaccurate to dismiss the 1948 constitutional process as though no representative elections had occurred. It would be equally inaccurate to describe the political environment of 1948 as equivalent to the fully competitive multiparty democracy that Taiwan subsequently developed.
The constitutional institutions of 1948 represented a significant milestone, but the civil war and the extraordinary political circumstances of the period prevented the new constitutional system from developing as originally intended.
The Tragedy of the Civil War and the Relocation to Taiwan
The Republic of China’s constitutional transition took place against the background of a devastating civil war.
The National Government (國民政府) emerged from the Second Sino-Japanese War with enormous military, financial, and administrative difficulties. Inflation, political corruption, strategic mistakes, and the changing military balance contributed to its defeat.
The major campaigns of 1948–1949 included the Liaohsi-Shenyang Campaign (遼西瀋陽會戰), the Hsuchow Campaign (徐蚌會戰), and the North China Campaign (平津會戰). Their outcomes destroyed much of the Nationalist government’s military capacity on the mainland.
Former Premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村) and other military commentators subsequently discussed the strategic errors surrounding the deployment and loss of Nationalist forces, particularly in Manchuria. The military defeat was not the result of one mistake alone, however, but of a combination of political, economic, logistical, and strategic factors.
In 1949, the government of the Republic of China relocated to Taiwan.
The human suffering of this period is powerfully described in Lung Ying-tai’s (龍應台) Big River, Big Sea—Untold Stories of 1949 (《大江大海一九四九》). Reading the book left me deeply saddened. Behind the military campaigns and political narratives were countless families separated by war, people forced to abandon their homes, and individuals whose lives were permanently changed by events beyond their control.
The tragedy of 1949 should not be understood solely through the victory or defeat of competing political organizations. It was also a tragedy for the people of the Republic of China.
The February 28 Incident and the Authoritarian Period
The Republic of China’s history in Taiwan also includes chapters that cannot be ignored.
Before the government’s relocation in 1949, Taiwan had experienced the February 28 Incident (二二八事件) of 1947. Administrative failures, economic hardship, corruption, and grievances against the authorities contributed to the outbreak of unrest, which was violently suppressed.
The repression resulted in extensive civilian suffering, including the persecution and killing of members of Taiwan’s local elite. The incident left deep wounds in Taiwanese society and contributed to tensions between different communities.
Recognizing this history does not require reducing the entire experience of the Republic of China in Taiwan to one episode. It does require acknowledging the responsibility of the authorities and the suffering of the victims.
Taiwan had also experienced limited local electoral participation during the Japanese colonial period, particularly in the 1930s. These elections were restricted and did not amount to modern democratic self-government, but they formed part of the island’s institutional development.
After 1949, local elections continued under the Republic of China government, even while national political life remained authoritarian. These elections were imperfect and constrained, yet they helped sustain political participation and eventually provided opportunities for opposition politicians to develop experience and public support.
The period of martial law, lasting from 1949 until 1987, involved censorship, political repression, surveillance, and restrictions on fundamental freedoms. The White Terror (白色恐怖) remains a painful part of the republic’s history.
I believe it is possible to recognize Chiang Kai-shek’s historical contribution to the survival of the Republic of China while also acknowledging the authoritarian character of his government. Constitutional patriotism should not depend on treating political leaders as infallible.
Diplomatic Isolation and the United Nations
The Republic of China also experienced profound diplomatic setbacks during the Cold War.
The United Kingdom recognized the so-called People’s Republic of China in 1950, while France did so in 1964. These decisions reflected the strategic calculations of their governments and the changing international balance of power.
For those of us who identify with the Republic of China’s historical continuity, these developments remain painful, particularly because the Republic of China had fought alongside the Allied powers during the Second World War and participated in the founding of the United Nations.
Article 23 of the United Nations Charter explicitly names the Republic of China among the original permanent members of the Security Council.
On October 25, 1971, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758, recognizing the representatives of the People’s Republic of China as the only legitimate representatives of China at the United Nations and removing the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek.
The resolution fundamentally changed China’s representation within the United Nations. However, the broader questions surrounding Taiwan’s international participation and political status remain subjects of disagreement.
My concern is that the people governed by the Republic of China should not be deprived of meaningful international participation simply because of the diplomatic contest over China’s representation.
The United Nations Charter contains important commitments to human rights and self-determination, although it does not make liberal democracy a universal condition of membership. The stronger normative argument is therefore that the political rights and interests of Taiwan’s people deserve consideration independently of disputes over diplomatic recognition.
The United States’ decision under President Jimmy Carter to terminate diplomatic relations with the Republic of China, effective January 1, 1979, was another major disappointment.
I remain critical of the expectation that engagement with the Chinese Communist Party would necessarily produce political liberalization. Subsequent developments provide substantial grounds for questioning that expectation, even while acknowledging the Cold War circumstances in which the original diplomatic decisions were made.
Chiang Ching-kuo, Lee Teng-hui, and Democratic Transformation
The democratic transformation of the Republic of China is one of the most remarkable achievements in its modern history.
Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), who became president in 1978, played an important role in the final years of authoritarian rule. Although his government had previously maintained extensive political restrictions, his eventual willingness to tolerate opposition activity and initiate reforms helped open the path toward democratization.
Chiang is widely associated with the principle that “There is no permanently ruling political party” (「世界上沒有永遠的執政黨」).
For me, this statement expresses one of the fundamental requirements of constitutional democracy. Political authority belongs neither to a party nor to a family. A legitimate government must accept that it can lose an election.
Martial law was lifted in Taiwan on July 15, 1987. Chiang died on January 13, 1988, and Vice President Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) succeeded him.
Lee’s presidency accelerated constitutional reform.
One major problem concerned the representatives elected in 1947–1948 who had continued serving for decades because nationwide elections could no longer be conducted in mainland constituencies. These long-serving representatives became associated with the expression Ten-Thousand-Year National Assembly (萬年國大), part of the broader phenomenon known as the ten-thousand-year parliament (萬年國會).
The arrangement had originally been justified by extraordinary circumstances, but it became increasingly incompatible with democratic accountability.
Beginning in 1991, the Constitution underwent seven rounds of amendment, culminating in 2005. The reforms abolished the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion (動員戡亂時期臨時條款), reorganized national representative institutions, introduced direct presidential elections, and ultimately eliminated the National Assembly as a standing constitutional institution.
In 1996, Lee Teng-hui became the first president elected directly by voters in Taiwan. This was a fundamentally different democratic milestone from Chiang Kai-shek’s indirect election by the National Assembly in 1948.
The peaceful transfer of presidential power to Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic Progressive Party (民主進步黨) in 2000 further demonstrated that the Republic of China had developed functioning multiparty electoral competition.
The republic that had struggled to establish constitutional government in 1912 had finally developed institutions through which citizens could freely choose their national leaders.
The Republic of China and Taiwan’s Democratic Identity
The democratic transformation also changed the relationship between the Republic of China and Taiwan.
For many Taiwanese families, the Republic of China had initially been associated with the postwar administration, the February 28 Incident, and decades of authoritarian government. Democratization gradually transformed the state into a political order whose legitimacy depended upon the participation and consent of the people living under its jurisdiction.
This development helped narrow the historical distance between the Republic of China’s constitutional identity and the democratic identity of Taiwan.
Nevertheless, differences concerning national identity remain. Some citizens identify primarily with Taiwan, others with the Republic of China, and others with both. A constitutional democracy must allow these positions to coexist through peaceful political competition.
My own identification remains rooted in the historical continuity of the Republic of China.
The Additional Articles of the Constitution (中華民國憲法增修條文) begin with the phrase 「為因應國家統一前之需要」, meaning that the constitutional amendments were adopted to meet the requirements of the nation prior to national unification.
This language preserves an important dimension of the Republic of China’s constitutional history. However, constitutional provisions concerning national territory and unification do not, by themselves, settle contemporary disputes about sovereignty or the political future of Taiwan.
I continue to hope that the people of mainland China may one day enjoy constitutional democracy, individual liberty, and the protection of fundamental rights.
Any future political relationship across the Taiwan Strait, including any possible form of unification, must depend upon peaceful constitutional arrangements and the freely expressed will of the people concerned.
Popular sovereignty cannot be defended by denying people the right to determine their own political future.
The Kuomintang and the Republican Principles I Continue to Value
My identification with the Republic of China has also shaped my relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party, or Kuomintang (中國國民黨).
The party played an indispensable historical role in the establishment and survival of the Republic of China. Its revolutionary origins can be traced to the organizations associated with Sun Yat-sen, including the Tongmenghui (中國同盟會).
The Kuomintang subsequently participated in the Northern Expedition, led the National Government during the war against Japan, and preserved the Republic of China after the military defeat of 1949.
These historical contributions do not erase the party’s responsibility for authoritarian rule and political repression.
I have often felt that, if I were ever to join a political party, the historical Kuomintang would be the organization with which I felt the strongest connection. I identify with its republican heritage, the Three Principles of the People, and the rejection of Communist dictatorship.
Yet I have become increasingly disappointed with the contemporary party, particularly with political rhetoric and approaches to cross-strait relations that, in my judgment, do not sufficiently distinguish peaceful engagement from accommodation of authoritarian power.
A party that claims the inheritance of the Chinese republican revolution should remember that Chinese civilization, Chinese identity, and the Chinese Communist Party are not interchangeable concepts.
The people of mainland China are not identical to the political organization that governs them.
One can identify with Chinese civilization, support constitutional democracy in Taiwan, respect the democratic choices of Taiwan’s people, and oppose Communist authoritarianism without contradiction.
Indeed, I believe these positions are mutually consistent.
From Ancient Athens to Modern Constitutionalism
Returning to Rubio’s speech in Athens, the most important connection with the Republic of China’s anniversary concerns the historical development of republican government.
Ancient Athens developed institutions of citizen participation, public deliberation, and political accountability that profoundly influenced later democratic thought.
Yet Athenian democracy was far from a modern liberal democracy. Women, enslaved people, and many residents were excluded from political citizenship. Its institutions also differed considerably from modern representative government.
The Roman Republic contributed another important inheritance: the organization of political authority through magistracies, assemblies, and a senate rather than permanent hereditary monarchy. Roman republicanism, however, was also constrained by oligarchic power, slavery, and imperial expansion.
The constitutional traditions of the United States subsequently drew upon these classical precedents, as well as English constitutional history and Enlightenment political philosophy.
The United States celebrates the 250th anniversary of its Declaration of Independence in 2026, but the intellectual foundations of its constitutional order extend far beyond those 250 years.
The American founding confronted a problem that remains central to political economy: how can government possess sufficient authority to protect society without becoming the greatest threat to the liberty of those it governs?
This question also lies at the heart of the Republic of China’s constitutional history.
The republican revolution of 1911 abolished hereditary monarchy, but the establishment of constitutional democracy required many additional decades of institutional development.
The lesson is that republican government cannot be reduced to a country’s official name or the absence of an emperor.
A republic can become authoritarian. A constitutional monarchy can protect individual liberty. What matters is whether political authority is accountable to the people and restrained by institutions that protect fundamental rights.
Popular Sovereignty and Economic Freedom
My understanding of republicanism is inseparable from classical liberalism.
Popular sovereignty is necessary, but it is not sufficient. A political majority should not possess unlimited authority over private property, freedom of expression, religious belief, voluntary association, or peaceful economic activity.
A constitutional order must protect individuals against arbitrary government power, including when that power claims democratic legitimacy.
This is also why I regard economic freedom as an essential component of a free society.
Private property, freedom of contract, entrepreneurship, competitive markets, and the ability to make independent economic decisions can strengthen the social foundations of political liberty.
A citizen who depends entirely upon political authorities for employment, income, housing, and economic opportunity may find it difficult to exercise political freedom independently.
Economic freedom is not a substitute for constitutional democracy. Nevertheless, a society in which individuals can establish businesses, own property, and exchange voluntarily creates additional opportunities for independent civic life.
Friedrich Hayek’s analysis of dispersed knowledge provides an important economic explanation. No central authority possesses all the knowledge required to coordinate a complex economy. Market prices and entrepreneurial decisions allow individuals to use information that cannot be fully centralized.
Constitutional government and decentralized markets therefore address related problems: the limitations of concentrated political authority and the importance of allowing individuals to make decisions within a framework of general rules.
The common lesson connecting ancient republicanism, American constitutionalism, and the democratic development of the Republic of China is not that all three traditions adopted identical institutions.
It is that political authority must ultimately serve individuals rather than demand their unconditional submission.
What Should the Republic of China Preserve?
When I remember the centennial celebrations of 2011, I think about how remarkable it was that the Republic of China had survived a century of political upheaval.
Today, fifteen years later, I am even more convinced that the republic’s greatest achievement is not simply its survival.
It is its democratic transformation.
The Republic of China has experienced the collapse of an empire, warlord fragmentation, foreign invasion, civil war, authoritarian government, diplomatic isolation, and profound constitutional reform.
Its history contains achievements worthy of admiration and injustices that must never be forgotten.
The representatives who participated in the 1946 National Constituent Assembly, including those from Taiwan Province, helped establish a constitutional framework based upon popular sovereignty and fundamental rights. The representatives elected to the First National Assembly in 1947 participated in the constitutional presidential election of 1948. These institutions were imperfect and operated under extraordinary historical constraints, but they were important milestones in the republic’s constitutional development.
The democratic reforms that followed decades later transformed those constitutional aspirations into institutions of competitive elections, political pluralism, and peaceful transfers of power.
That achievement belongs not to one political party, one family, or one historical leader. It belongs to the generations of people who struggled to make constitutional government a reality.
On this 115th National Day, I continue to identify with the Republic of China and its historical inheritance. I honor the revolutionaries who sought to end imperial rule, the soldiers and civilians who suffered during war, the victims of authoritarian repression, and the citizens who contributed to democratization.
I also hope that the people of mainland China will one day enjoy the same constitutional freedoms that citizens in Taiwan exercise today.
Returning to the image of Athens, I believe that the greatness of a republic should ultimately be measured not by the permanence of its rulers, the power of its political parties, or the extent of its territorial ambitions, but by the freedom of its people and the limits placed upon political authority.
The Republic of China was founded in the name of republican government. Its history reminds us how difficult it is to fulfill that promise.
Its democratic development in Taiwan reminds us that the promise can nevertheless be realized.
Happy 115th National Day of the Republic of China.
中華民國一百一十五年國慶快樂！
Suggested References
Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962). The calculus of consent: Logical foundations of constitutional democracy. University of Michigan Press.
Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530.
Office of the President, Republic of China (Taiwan). (n.d.). Introduction to the Constitution of the Republic of China.
Rubio, M. (2026, October 7). Remarks at the Pnyx, Athens, Greece. U.S. Department of State. Speech transcript.
Taiwan Historica (國史館臺灣文獻館). (n.d.). The National Constituent Assembly and the Taiwan delegation (制憲國民大會與臺灣代表團).
Taiwan Historica (國史館臺灣文獻館). (n.d.). Taiwan’s first presidential inauguration (臺灣首次總統就職典禮).
Legislative Yuan Museum (立法院議政博物館). (n.d.). Historical records of the First National Assembly.
United Nations General Assembly. (1971, October 25). Restoration of the lawful rights of the People’s Republic of China in the United Nations (Resolution 2758 [XXVI]).
Copyright Notice: This article is the intellectual property of its author. If you wish to reproduce or share it, you must clearly indicate the original source and provide proper attribution. Unauthorized copying or distribution without acknowledgment is strictly prohibited.
How to Cite this Commentary (APA 7th edition)
Wang, H. H. (2026, October 10). From Athens to the Republic of China: 115 years of republicanism, constitutionalism, and the pursuit of liberty.
